Image by Boch
Previous Post
Next Post

By Mark Oliva

Retired Marine Colonel Craig Tucker is throwing in his 25 years of Marine Corps service, combat experience and military expertise to deny Californians their Second Amendment rights. The problem is, he’s doing it on a bed of verifiably false allegations of what today’s Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR) is and isn’t. He discloses that he’s being compensated for his “expert” opinion at $200 an hour.

Colonel Tucker, a former Commander of the Corps’ Regimental Combat Team 7 that fought in the 2004 Battle of Fallujah, filed expert testimony in Rupp v. Bonta, the case that California’s Attorney General Robert Bonta is desperately trying to keep California’s “assault weapon” ban alive. That case was originally filed in 2017.

In June of last year, the U.S. District Court’s order was vacated by U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit and remanded back to the District Court given the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, which expressly forbids the court from using an “interest balancing” test to decide Constitutionality of Second Amendment-related cases.

Col. Craig A. Tucker
Col. Craig A. Tucker, USMC (image: SSGT Paul L. Anstine II, USMC)

Justice Clarence Thomas expressly forbid the practice in Bruen, writing in the majority opinion, “The Second Amendment ‘is the very product of an interest balancing by the people’ and it ‘surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms’ for self-defense.”

Attorney General Bonta is scrambling to salvage what’s left of California’s unconstitutional ban on the most popular-selling semiautomatic rifle in America. There are over 24.4 million of these rifles – AR-15s and AK47s – in circulation today. They discharge one cartridge for each pull of the trigger – no different than popular semiautomatic duck hunting shotguns or personal defense handguns.

Colonel Tucker argues that these are firearms meant only for military use. I’m not writing to impugn the colonel’s character. Like him, I’ve served in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. I carried the M4, firing the 5.56mm cartridge. I own several MSRs, chambered to accept .223 Remington/5.56mm and 6.5mm Creedmoor ammunition. Like him, I’ve got extensive experience with the Colt 1911 .45 caliber handgun as well as multiple handguns chambered for 9mm, including Beretta’s M9.

beretta M9A1 review
Remember, these pistols blow the lungs right out of the human body. (Chris Heuss for TTAG)

The facts he presents to the court, however, are verifiably false.

Mythical M-4 & 5.56mm

Colonel Tucker qualified MSRs as “assault weapons” based on California’s list of cosmetic characteristics that have nothing to do whatsoever with the rifle’s actual functions. He testifies that the selector switch that renders an M4 capable of automatic fire is a “picayune” or “petty or worthless” difference. By that definition, Colonel Tucker, would classify any semiautomatic firearm as a “weapon of war.”

But he goes further.

“A single round is capable of severing the upper body from the lower body, or decapitation. The round is designed to kill, not wound, and both the AR-15 and M4 contain barrel rifling to make the round tumble upon impact and cause more severe injury.”

barrel rifling
The horror…the horror…. (Shutterstock)

I’m not doubting the colonel’s combat acumen. I certainly can’t say that’s what I saw in combat. I never witnessed a single 5.56mm round fired at the enemy decapitate or sever a human body in half.

If this were true of the 5.56mm cartridge, it would beg the question why the military is spending millions to move to the 6.8mm Next Generation Squad Weapon, using a heavier caliber that carries more kinetic energy downrange. It would also beg the question of why the military also uses 7.62x51mm, .300 Winchester Magnum, .338 Lapua Magnum and .50 BMG caliber ammunition. If the 5.56mm cartridge were that devastating, there would clearly be no additional need for heavier bullets with more gunpowder behind them.

I’ve killed coyotes and prairie dogs with both 5.56mm and .223 Remington. Nothing of what Colonel Tucker describes ever happened even on these much smaller targets. In fact, in my home state, the .223/5.56mm cartridge isn’t considered powerful enough for an ethical harvest of whitetail deer.

Rifling, Stocks & Grips

The barrel rifling remark is odd too, especially coming from an infantry officer. I have studied firearms and it’s common knowledge that rifling is designed to improve accuracy by stabilizing the bullet in flight as it travels toward the target, not to make it tumble upon impact. Artillery tubes have rifling for the same reason.

Colonel Tucker’s military “expertise” isn’t done, though. He claims that pistol grips and adjustable stocks on rifles are especially deadly.

AR-15 pistol grip
Oh…my…GOD… (Dan Z. for TTAG)

“It is my opinion, based on my military service, that these features, individually and in combination, make semiautomatic rifles more lethal and most useful in combat settings, as described in more detail below,” Colonel Tucker testified.

Those are also the same features which allow for greater control and more accuracy when firing. That means safer shooting. The adjustable stock makes it so my wife can fit the same MSR to her body that I fit to mine, with minor adjustments of the length of pull. Adjusting stocks to be customized to the shooter is not a new concept. Rifle and shotgun shooters have been doing it forever.

Savage AccuFit buttstock
Savage’s AccuFit buttstock is very adjustable for both comb height and length of pull.

This isn’t the first time Colonel Tucker’s taken on lawful firearm ownership. He coauthored an article in 2017 with two other Marines, one of whom I personally served with in the Corps. The column attacked the NRA for what they termed “engaging in shameless fear tactics.” They added . . .

We believe that ALL of our civil liberties are worth defending for ALL Americans—including protection from the use of excessive lethal force by those sworn to protect and serve our communities.

That’s all rights…except the full spectrum of Second Amendment rights, apparently.

Full Semiautomatic

It’s not the first time military officers used rank to present themselves as an authority on firearms. Army Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling did this with CNN following the tragedies in Parkland, Fla., when he explained to a reporter that he was going to fire on “full semiautomatic.”

That was lampooned, not just because of the ill-turn of phrase, but because of the intentional narrative twisting. Military officers are using their former ranks to tell the American public they can’t be trusted to possess commonly-owned and commonly-used firearms.

I’m proud of my service. I’m proud of the Marines I served with, including Marines like Colonel Tucker, with whom I passionately disagree on this issue. The American public should be keenly aware that the U.S. military is very good at what it does. That’s control. That control, however, should never be exerted on the American public, especially when it is presented as “expert testimony” that is dubious at best and verifiably false at worst.

The American public generally respects and admires military leaders. But, we should not be blinded to the facts by military brass.

Apparently at $200 an hour, California is getting a steal on this testimony, however much damage it may be intended to do to Second Amendment rights.

Mark Oliva is NSSF’s Managing Director of Public Affairs. He is a retired Marine Master Gunnery Sergeant with 25 years of service, including tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Albania, and Zaire.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. That Colonel is a disgrace and violates his oath the defend the Constitution. He is in fact attacking it, for money. So he is nothing more than a paid mercenary terrorist against the US. Retirement pay and benefits should be terminated. Perhaps he should be in the brig.

      • “romantic entanglement” is a nice way of saying that he was boinking a subordinate while he was married. Fraternization plus adultery, both crimes under UCMJ. If he had not retired, he would have faced a court martial.

        • It was a Article 15. He could of demanded a trial by court-martial.
          Instead he retired and now is a paid anti 2A whore.

      • Unfortunately the personal life of tucker goes nowhere as does the rest of his baggage without first Defining Gun Control in any shape, matter or form as a History Confirmed agenda rooted in Racism and Genocide…If you want to corner the tucker let the history of his Gun Control rot put him in camp with racists and nazis and see what he has to say.

    • He certainly rose to his level of incompetence.

      I think he was given a crayola mega pack in addition to his $200 ph.

  2. Looking back on my time, I would have never thought my time in uniform was enough to make me an expert on firearms. We were all taught how to clean our weapons and pull the trigger. Hardly anything beyond that, so treating veterans as if they all, by default, have more knowledge than the average citizen is a fallacy of the highest order.

    When veterans lean on their experience in the military to teach civilians about topics relating to weaponry I get instantly suspicious, and highly annoyed then they do stupid bubblegum like this idiot.

    • I was thinking the same.
      I have an Expert rating with the M16A2 Service Rifle via the USMC.
      But it was not until I started shooting NRA High Power Rifle and hand loading that I understood internal, external and terminal ballistics.
      While I know more than some, and less than others, I am always learning.

    • I get extremely annoyed. Especially since I hold an actual Additional Skill Identifier that makes me an expert on (some) weapons: M1 Tank Master Gunner. Now, that makes me fairly knowledgable about the M256 tank main gun, M-2HB, and M-240, as well as all the fire control systems for them. Including their ballistics and terminal effects. That said, I know (from military training) how to zero and shoot an M-16 and how to shoot an M1911A1 or M9. I was never trained on ballistics or terminal effects or wound ballistics of small arms. and I have no special military expertise in that area. In fact, 99.9% of the Army and Marines never get training on such things. Not even colonels.

      • And you think that makes YOU special because? 6 1/2 years USMC, 39 months Vietnam, qualified expert M14, M16, .45, deadly with a 50 cal, an M60 and a number of Russian and Chinese firearms as well as hand to hand combat w/knife AND E-tool… So you can shoot a tank? cool if you’re not in the middle of a jungle or on top of a fukin mountain where a tank is useless…

    • We were all taught how to clean our weapons and pull the trigger.

      So, Army? Navy? Air Force? Coast Guard?… USMC used to spend two weeks on firearms training and qualification… Yeah I consider myself adequately qualified to operate every firearm I own AND to help others gain the necessary confidence to defend themselves.

      • Whoop-de-fucking-do. We’re so proud of you. Not 1/10th as proud as you are of yourself, of course, but you do you. You’re not the Only One who has a clue, but jesus fucking christ but you’ve got a chapped ass. They make ointment for that shit, you know. Give it a try.

      • Don’t get Madd, but the USAF completed my training on the M-16 in one afternoon, gave me an Expert badge into the bargain! And sent me to Vietnam with it!

        • How often did you use it?… Apparently, that’s about all any of the services is doing today, just sad…

  3. Colonel Tucker unlikely has fired a weapon since basic training based on the nonsense he’s rattling off. Officers in Iraq and Afghanistan might have been desk jockeys, sounds like he was one, or he took a IED to the head and it scrambled his brains. Unfortunate that someone that might have been a warrior at one time would betray the American people with lies.

    • He commanded 2/7 Marines in combat in Anbar Province, so not a desk jockey. Doesn’t mean he is a weapons expert, though. That’s what Master Gunners (at least in the Army) are for. In a tank battalion, each company, plus the battalion headquarters, has a Master Gunner. Some of the 1SG’s and the CSM may also have been to Master Gunner school. So, let’s call it 7 people with that training, in a unit of 800 soldiers. Less than 1% of a combat battalion. The commander of the battalion relies on his Master Gunners, as do the company commanders, the S-3 and the XO.

      He’s a combat vet, but that doesn’t mean Tucker has any special firearms knowledge beyond what a typical private has. Quite unlikely, since line officers spend their time acquiring leadership and tactics knowledge and spending time on firearms expertise is kind of wasteful when you have such experts available to advise you.

  4. I the article linked above where he criticizes the NRA, they say “While we would expect Loesch and Stinchfield to engage in such paid partisan hyperbole, we are embarrassed that a fellow veteran like Dom Raso would stoop to partisan fear-mongering and denigrate himself in the same manner.

    We expect more from our veterans.”

    Seems he has become exactly the kind of money-grubbing, bottom feeding, statist whore he denigrated just a few years ago.

  5. One of the big problems is that the narrative is controlled so someone who IS a actual weapons expert is not allowed to refute. Heck, the crap he’s spouting for money can easily be refuted by any of POTG.

  6. “I’m not doubting the colonel’s combat acumen. I certainly can’t say that’s what I saw in combat. I never witnessed a single 5.56mm round fired at the enemy decapitate or sever a human body in half.”

    Okay–I’ll step in here for a moment. Lots of a junior door-kicker, Platoon Commander, Commander, Advisor, and later a staff guy. THIS Colonel sat his happy ass on a FOB. He *managed* Marines in combat. Once. One tour in Ramadi in between the invasion but before the insurgency REALLY took off (with help from Iran and others). It started in late ’03/early 04…but that was mainly the former Ba’athists who lost jobs, etc. 2005 was when the Sectarian violence took off and they were deeply embedded with Iranians making explosively formed projectiles (EFPs) to penetrate the more heavily armored vehicles (UAHs & MRAPs).

    All that to say…yes, he was in theater. Probably got a handful of medals. But I have serious doubts about his PERSONAL experience that would lead him to believe anyone was decapitated or had half their body eviscerated. This is only about scoring political points. Possibly for money. Or to pay for his sin tax to “the community” (or his former wife).

  7. quote———– Military officers are using their former ranks to tell the American public they can’t be trusted to possess commonly-owned and commonly-used firearms.———quote

    And the bloody U.S. history with assault rifles has proven the Military Officers are correct i.e. “the Naked Ape” cannot be trusted with weapons of mass destruction.

    • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, For your edification ( am repeating this for about the 400th time), the AR-15, is NOT an “assault rifle”. First of all the term is a misnomer coined buy the Germans during WWII. The AR-15 civilian version is not issued by any military to their armed forces in the entire world. You see, an AR-15 is a “semi-automatic” rifle. You do understand the term ‘semi-automatic”?
      By the way, we are still waiting for your telling us the firing sequence of a cartridge.

    • It seems to me that all of those soldiers in the field in war are naked apes, ordered to commit unimaginable violence upon a bunch of other naked apes, as ordered by those very same officers, with weapons and weapons systems of far greater power than the lowly M4 rifle.

    • Once again, you’re premise is incorrect. There is no “bloody U.S. history with assault rifles,” at least not in the way you mean it. The U.S. history with “assault rifles” is virtually entirely in the U.S. military because, aside from a scant few, pre ’86, massively expensive examples, no one but the military and police have any. (You see, there were no “assault rifles”, by definition, before 1944 and since that is a decade after the NFA …)

      Since what you are talking about is civilian on civilian murders, how do you get to “bloody history” when rifles *of all types* are involved in roughly 700 murders each year (in which none of those are with “assault rifles” and a portion may or may not be with the undefined and undefinable “assault weapon”) in a nation with 330,000,000 people and more than 400,000,000 guns. Seems to me that those 700 are not a “bloody history” but, rather a rounding error.

      Have I mentioned yet today that you are an idiot?

      • to My name is mud

        So now you are arguing over numbers. If the pile of dead bloody bodies is only 3 high and not 4 high that is an acceptable right off on the altar of no gun control.

        Right back at you as not I but you are the idiot.

        • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, Sorry, Ole Boy but there is no “pile of dead bodies”.
          Seems you are worshiping before the altar of gun control.

    • That is why it is usually States that control WMDs. The common citizen does not have the infrastructure to store, use or maintain WMDs, which are Nuclear, Biological or Chemical (NBC) in nature.

      Governments, like the type you envision have murdered and killed more people with firearms than common criminals do. Maybe we shouldn’t trust governments with weapons and keep the citizenry armed?

      • use or maintain WMD, Chemical (NBC) in nature.

        There are chemical weapons that can be put together with a few simple household cleaning products… (according to a friend)..

    • I never realized that Assault Rifles fire Nuclear Weapons
      When did they develop that round?

      Good thing only the Military and Law Enforcement are allowed to own them.

      Of course you might want to read your inflammatory comments before you post them.

    • dacian the demented dios***,

      So, lemme get this straight – ANYONE you cite in support of your (absurd) fascist gun control arguments is an unimpeachable source, but serious researchers are “paid flacks” and totally “debunked” if they do not parrot your preferred lies. A veteran is a ‘knowledgeable source’ if they parrot your idiocy, but a mere “knuckle-dragging Right-wing nut (probably scarred by PTSD) if they don’t. Does that about sum it up, dacian the demented???

      You’ve been presented facts (like, for example, that LESS THAN 3% of gun homicides are committed by rifles of ANY type, let alone AR-15s, and that AR-15s are NOT, and never have been, ‘assault rifles’), and yet still you continue to vomit out this verbal diarrhea about these “deadly military weapons”, when the facts prove you conclusively wrong.

      A smart man named Einstein had a description of what it is when you continue doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. I would commend his quote to your attention but, (i) you are far too stupid to even know who Einstein was, (ii) you would be incapable of reading OR comprehending his quote, even if I cited you to it, (iii) you are bereft of knowledge of even the most BASIC facts about firearms, despite loudly claiming knowledge you obviously do not possess. dacian the demented, we long ago saw through your patent partisan, ignorant, UNEDUCATED idiocy, and we discount everything you say, automatically. While a stopped clock may be right twice a day, it is not worth digging through your piles of word vomit to TRY to extract the occasional accidental truth.

      You are a moron, dacian. You know F***-ALL about firearms . . . or anything else, for that matter. You are a completely indoctrinated ignoranus of a partisan nincompoop, you couldn’t recognize logic if it fell out of the sky, landed on your face, and started to wiggle. And, you are too completely and absurdly stupid to insult.

      Fuck off and die, dacian, and that right quick.

      • Lamp:
        Dacian notwithstanding, could you please repeat the Einstein quote you referred to here for my personal edification?

  8. As former USMC I am disgusted with this man, to me he is a traitor to the Marine Corp and citizens in general. He swore an oath to uphold the constitution and it does not sound like he is fulfilling his sworn duty. Any one who is in the armed services should know that civilians do not have assault weapons and only the military does. He is crazy comparing an M-4 to a AR-15, not even close in comparison. I can’t imagine why he thinks like he does unless he is a college educated democrat that has lived in a left wing society and doesn’t know any better.

    • LOL frankly, a couple of my AR-15’s far outperform the M-16A2’s that I carried in the Army. Except for the lack of burst or auto. Which is fine, because the point of the 2A is to protect my right to keep and bear arms. Specifically, ones that enable me and my fellow patriots to fight and defend our homes and country against enemies foreign and domestic. In other words, weapons of war.

    • Samson, the quality of the characters of those who promoted him are in question too. I certainly hope this is an isolated case relative to this bird and not a glimpse of how off track our military has traveled.

      • You never know what is happening in the background, it is hard to trust anybody anymore. I pray to the LORD that we have better leader’s than this.

    • This type of “about face” is becoming more frequently in and post USMC careers among senior officers. Amazing how many buy into the democrat socialists playbook that feeds the marxism that seeks to destroy our country from within. Semper Fidelis is no longer their motto.

      • honor and character from my day is slowly slipping away. it’s sad to see the younger crowd with no honor, character, and patriotism.

  9. “I’m not doubting the colonel’s combat acumen. I certainly can’t say that’s what I saw in combat. I never witnessed a single 5.56mm round fired at the enemy decapitate or sever a human body in half.”

    You never saw that because it doesn’t happen.

    For that to happen with the single .223 round the colonel claimed it happens with would mean a lot more energy that simply is impossible under the laws of physics for that size round. The human body is held together at the molecular level by energy bonds between the molecules, this is a lot of energy that needs to be over come to be able to separate a body in half or decapitate like he has claimed with a single .223 round. First, the energy at impact from a single .223 round would need to be great enough to overcome and obliterate every single energy bond between molecules along the line of separation from the point of impact and radiating out and through and a single .223 round impact simply does not happen like that and can’t. Second, the round would need to move at a constant velocity that is more than a million times greater than what a .223 round travels no matter what firearm its fired from, and never slow down even one iota upon impact or after passing through the tissue. Third, a single .223 round simply does not have the mass necessary, no matter the grain weight fired from the MSR or the military M4, to have enough energy to do the magic trick the colonel claims for a single .223 round.

    It simply is not possible, no matter what he claims for his single .223 round. To do so would be a violation of the very laws of physics and basically, for the energy needed, if that much energy in such a small mass were possible and controllable time travel devices and teleporters would be something you could pick up at the grocery store.

    • “He took an oath”. So do cop’s & politicians. So did Judas Iscariot🙁🙄…hey how much is 30 pieces of silver worth in 2023???

    • I was worried that I had defective military grade ammunition during my tours. No one I ever shot or seen shot with 5.56 ever exhibited the damage I keep hearing people like this or with 7.62 either. Now that dude that got in the the way of an AT4 was a different story.

  10. “and both the AR-15 and M4 contain barrel rifling to make the round tumble upon impact and cause more severe injury.”

    That little gem of complete BS.

    First, think about it. The bullet has been fired and left the barrel, the rifling has no contact with the bullet when it hits the target. So how does this rifling make the “round tumble upon impact”? Think about it… does the rifling jump out of the barrel and grab the bullet down range to make it tumble? Maybe the rifling leaves the barrel to travel down range with the bullet laying in wait to make the bullet tumble upon impact?

    There is no rifling in the “AR-15 and M4” that makes the bullet tumble upon impact.

    Its simple physics; The bullet tumbles because it becomes unstable upon impact as it passes from the less dense air its been traveling through compared to the denser target ‘material’ of the body. On the energy level, as it impacts the denser material of a body it sheds more of its velocity energy very quickly and slows, and as it slows it no longer has the energy to remain stable and begins to tumble. That’s why it tumbles on impact. It is not due to any barrel rifling.

    • This is correct, although usually it is more of a yaw around the axis of travel. Which happens with any bullet fired from a rifled barrel. And if they really want to see some horrific terminal effects, folks should look at what Minie Balls did.

      • …or .65 caliber soft lead balls that preceded the Minie. (Minies were usually .58 cal.) The benefit of the Minie was accuracy compared to the prior round balls.

      • The M855 62 grain projectile is stabilized in flight by the twist of the barrel (early M16’s didn’t have enough twist to fully stabilize the bullet, but that’s another story) The M855 projectile is not a copper jacked lead round, but a steel tipped copper jacketed lead core bullet. On impact the round tends to tumble and yaw, causing more damage. The purpose of this round it to disable the target, not necessarily kill. The Russians followed with their version in 5.45×39 nicknamed “The poison bullet” by the Afghanistan tribesmen because of the damage the projectile did to soft tissue.

        • “On impact the round tends to tumble and yaw, causing more damage.”

          No, The M855 will usually punch clean through a target, doing minimal damage unless you hit a vital organ or important artery. That’s why it’s called a “penetrator” The M193 is prone to fragmentation upon contact with a target which is better at doing much more damage to soft tissue. Both do much better with a with a fast twist rate but both are actually pretty weak being 5.56.

    • Tucker clearly has no idea what he is talking about, but the colonel’s mistake is based on a kernel of “truth”.

      In Vietnam a combination of factors (chiefly bullet construction) caused many projectiles to fragment on impact, similar to frangible or varmint loads. This meant occasionally nastier looking wounds than the bullets they replaced. That much is true, or true enough.

      At that time, and as repeated long after, the fragmentation was thought to be caused by a mismatch between the “slow” 1:14 rifling and a “longer/heavier” bullet that was just at the edge of stability. So while rifling in general is meant to add stability, some believed that the particular rifling rate of those M16s when combined with that bullet were intentionally designed for terminal instability. Rifling made it unstable in this specific context, or better stated, the rifling rate made it just stable enough to fly strait, then tumble when it hit. Of course that context turned out to be wrong, but lots of people still believe and repeat it.

      It turned out to be mostly a bullet thing, not the rifling. And current MSRs often have faster rifling, and stronger bullets. And this guy obviously doesn’t know the difference, but I think it helps us understand the source of his confusion.

      • there is no kernal of truth in …

        “both the AR-15 and M4 contain barrel rifling to make the round tumble UPON impact and cause more severe injury.”

        its blatantly false.

      • “In Vietnam a combination of factors (chiefly bullet construction) caused many projectiles to fragment on impact, similar to frangible or varmint loads. This meant occasionally nastier looking wounds than the bullets they replaced. That much is true, or true enough.”

        that’s not what he said in his testimony. he said…a single. 223 round would sever a body in half and decapitate.

        it can’t… there is no nugget of truth in what he said, its blatantly false.

        • Well, yeah, what he said was idiotic and he likely knew it was untrue. I agree that point-and-laugh is our appropriate first response. But he didn’t just pick “rifling” out of nowhere and if we are going to argue the details I think it’s worth sharing the root of some of these misconceptions with each other.

          If some stooge digs up the old “rifling” myth and one account of a hand or finger or even a bicep being removed by 5.56 they could make his statements just plausible enough for middle-grounders (or a jury) to buy in. We should know all the background so we can counter.

          I did not intend to excuse his perjury.

      • The very concept that our government even approached the level of competence, at ANY endeavor, necessary to accomplish even a small fraction of design parameters to cause these unquestionably impossible results is completely ridiculous. Never attribute to evil intent that which can be explained by simple incompetence on a massive scale, or something like that. Our most devoted traitors and wannabe dictators are invariably unable to find their asses, much less wipe them. Taking them seriously at any endeavor is laughable.

    • something your not considering and the retarded col has no clue about, is a shot out barrel where the rifling is gone, or off balance bullet from bad manufacturing.
      with no spin the bullet will tumble in the air.
      I have a shot out barrel on my full auto gun that at 15 feet the bullets hit targets sideways.

    • At least the “good” knows the difference between a rifled barrel and smooth bore. He must be one of. those that think the 2A means we can only have muskets.

  11. A prostitute, whether paid $50/hr, $200/hr or $1000/hr, is still a prostitute. Some are more honest and ethical than others and admit what they are.
    This former Col. Tucker, seduced a subordinate for sex and then continued to be engaged in Adultery and cheating on his spouse so his integrity and creditably is SPOILED rotten. He betrayed the Marine Corp and his spouse and he is perhaps willing to betray others.

    • Well, according to the libertarians the liberals and the left adultery should be made legal. After all according to them it’s just sex between consenting adults. However if soldiers and civilians were allowed to carry guns 24/7, everyone would be compelled, through self-preservation, to be more polite to each other. And not violate another person’s family.

      • Many libertarians say the government has nothing to do with marriage beyond arbitration of contract disputes. They would consider adultery a breach of contract and therefore should produce consequences.

        • Congratulations on being the first libertarian who has said that there are consequences, that come out of adulterous relationships. Thank you for saying that.

      • Chris T,

        Ooops, looks like the local libertarian nailed your girlfriend again last night. Sorry about that, chief. And if said local libertarian actually matches your mental fiction about what “a libertarian is”? He/she/it is NOT a ‘libertarian’.

        You seriously need to climb off of this stupid hobby horse you long ago rode to death, dude. You’re almost as bad as Debbie One-note and her “all gun control comes from Nazi slave-traders!!!” rant.

        Find a new gig; this one got old years ago, died years ago, and has been stinking up the place for years. Give it a freakin’ rest. YOU DON’T LIKE ‘LIBERTARIANS’ (even though you have no frickin’ clue what a ‘libertarian’ is). We ‘get it’. I am happy to stipulate that we will all consider the words “And anything bad I commented about is EXACTLY what those libertarians would do, if we let them!” will automatically be appended to the end of your every comment.

        Dude, go get drunk and/or laid, maybe you’ll chill the f*** out.

        • Lawmaker Scott Weiner wrote the law that took away the autonomy of California schools to locally allow guns to be brought on to school campuses. As long as it was allowed by the principal and the school boards.

          And while he took away guns from law abiding parents and teachers. He is comfortable with allowing prostitution to be conducted in front of those same schools.

          The libertarian position on prostitution is to make it legal. And prevent the government from regulating it in anyway. So I say that Libertarians are quite comfortable with prostitutes conducting their activities, negotiations, and sex acts in front of California schools.
          Am I wrong about that? And if I am why??? Because these are the things, that Libertarians of advocating for.

          “Video showing alleged sex workers soliciting outside CA school sparks call for action” video 9 min long

  12. Good news, he says full-auto is less lethal. The legal, new machine guns should start appearing on racks at the LGS next week.

  13. I appreciate Colonel Tucker’s service.
    However, his knowledge of firearms is far from “expert”.

    Rifling stabilizes a bullet, it does not cause it to tumble.
    As far as decapitation is concerned, I have yet to see that happen in a smaller animal.

    A firearm part may be small, but that does not lessen it’s effectiveness.

    He’s wrong.
    He’s paid to be wrong.

    • I appreciate Colonel Tucker’s service.

      I do not. That’s the kind of “service” it seems he was “administering” to that little tart in a uniform instead of “servicing” his wife.

      My Dad described a small job he was given a couple times a year when he was much younger…. taking one of the family’s cows, halterig her and leading her up the road to the neighbours to be “serviced”by their bull. And it would also seem that this guy is STILL”servicing”.. us.. by telling his lies to promote our disarmament .

      There is a word for this type of “service”. It starts with the letter “T” and the rest of it sounds like “reason” but is not.

      I think I remember hearing about certain military types, when playing the harlot in various ways, would be on the receiving end of some live fire, specifically intended to disable and thus rendered unable to continue their serving in the mililtary Almost surprised a lout of this”small”caliber has not yet received this treatment.

  14. This is how “fragging” becomes a thing. And I can see having a long range 308 rifle can come in handy in a national divorce.
    It was California police officers. Who traveled to New Orleans Louisiana during the hurricane Katrina recovery effort. Who beat up an old woman and confiscated her revolver all live on the Fox News channel.
    And it was US Army soldiers of the Louisiana national guard, marching through New Orleans neighborhoods and confiscated guns.
    Never Forget.

    • “US Army soldiers of the Louisiana national guard,”

      Yes, there were California police officers too who did this.

      But for the military; Actually it was US Army soldiers of the Louisiana national guard, and other states national guard troops who had been placed on title 10 orders and that made them U.S. government federal troops. Literally, the U.S. government by federal troops went door to door with the N.O. Police department and unconstitutionally and illegally with use of force or showing force confiscated firearms and entered homes illegally without warrant by use of compelling armed force presence. The Louisiana legislature put a stop to it when they found out about it but the damage had already been done.

      • There was one military unit who refused to follow orders. And that military unit came from the state of Utah. I wish the video was still out there. Because it would show the unit Commander telling the local press that they were there to help. They were not there to help confiscate the weapons of law-abiding people, who had lost everything after a hurricane. He ordered his troops to return to Utah. And they left.

        So yes there are members of the military in leadership positions. Who will refuse to follow orders, when told to confiscate the guns from law abiding American citizens.

      • Now you are being just silly.
        There are plenty of self-described Libertarians who are extremely weak on the Second Amendment. But I don’t know of any of them who support the confiscation of guns from the law abiding.

        And I don’t know how it’s even possible. But I did meet people who claimed they were libertarian while serving in the military. I know that there are Libertarians who volunteered to serve in the military. And why they would do that???

        I have no idea. Because based on their own philosophy a libertarian would never voluntarily serve in a military organization. So perhaps those who claim to be Libertarians, and claim to have served in the military, aren’t really Libertarians at all.

        • Last I heard, a Libertarian expects the government to build our roads, defend our shores, and stay the hell out of our lives. That requires a military, so I think you are wrong.

  15. Whatever kudos and commendations could have been applied to this tool, they’re all negated now….Most likely knew he would never darken the doorstep as a government employee, contractor, or politician based on his “retirement” reasons, so he did the next best thing a cake-eater does, became a whore for the left…

  16. Just want to say that after reading all these comments,
    This fellow up here called Eric, seems to know what he’s talking about.
    Most combat vets should agree.

    • He covered most of it well in a previous comment section. I did a wild ass guess the former marine (yeah I know but he was kicked out in all but dishonorable discharge) was booted out due to zipper control and ended up basically correct. Either way very few officers I would ever begin to listen to re weapons and most of them tend to be either mustangs or had better weapons at home than what we were issued.

  17. As a Marine Vietnam veteran with over 60 years of experience with most of the popular rifles and handguns available to the general population I can only say, “why the fuck are these assholes NOT giving me the opportunity to cash in on that shit”, at least I fired a rifle (Numerous times) at another individual with the intent to end his ability to cause me harm (successfully on MOST occasions) so why should I not get a payday for three years of crawling through rice paddys and triple canopy jungle?…

    • Well there is the truth and the “truth™” which one would you be telling? Up end you know it actually gets put to good use and built upon here.

  18. Personally, I want to know what the Colonels’ exact MOS is?was. That will give a better picture of what his knowledge of firearms is. (Does not stop him from prostituting himself to the gun control crowd.)

  19. The “COLONEL” is confusing his munitions!!!

    The US military uses 5.56 not .223!!!

    So when he sees 5.56 somewhere his brain immediately thinks of .50 BMG!!!

  20. With all due respect to the Colonel, if the California Attorney General really wanted to put an expert on the stand, he would have called a Gunnery Sergeant or a Master Gunnery Sergeant and not an officer. What he wanted was a show.

  21. This character has impugned his own character and besmirched The Corp by lying his butt off at $200/hour.

    No matter what he’s done in his past he’s fashioned a legacy of deceit for himself. One wonders if there were any similar instances while he was on active duty.

  22. Serious mental defect.
    The 1775 Patriots did not need a license or permission to revolt and that right still exist today.
    See the photos of the Cadet Corp of the thousands of high schools in the USA as boys from 11 years old on, were issued guns by the school to train with.
    Every day you would see boys under arms marching around the schools and then go target shooting with their arms then back to school to clean and store their weapons.
    Photos of Boston Common show thousands of armed Cadets and tens of thousands of cheering crowds as the Cadets assembled for review by the Mayor of Boston the Massachusetts Governor. Awards were presented to various schools.
    Then as they had marched to the Common under arms, they then marched under arms back to school to store their school bought guns.
    What a glorious time then for America.
    So whatever the colonel has to say about self-loading firearms, is garbage.

  23. When military/police attempt to use their title/power/authority against “the people” (Constitution), they become traitors and must be dealt with as such.

  24. Marriage and family were the first institutions blessed and ordained by God for the benefit to mankind (even before Government).
    If Col.Tucker does not hold his marriage Vow sacred, why should we expect him to hold any other oath sacred, including our oath to support and defend the constitution!
    He has proven himself to be a whore and disgrace to his marriage, the uniform, 2A and the constitution!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here